DOCSLIB.ORG

Methodology for Rating Parents, Subsidiaries, and Issues Version 2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Methodology for Rating Parents, Subsidiaries, and Issues Version 2 ? Methodology for Rating Parents, Subsidiaries, and Issues Version 2 Morningstar Credit Research August 2016 Introduction Ratings of individual debt instruments may be adjusted up or down from the Consolidated Corporate Rating to take into account the individual security's priority of payment. Priority of payment for an Morningstar Credit Analysts individual debt instrument is determined by its issuer's place in the corporate structure, its seniority with respect to other debt, and the collateral securing it (if any). Priority of payment can be determined for the debt instruments of a corporation at any CCR rating level, from AAA to C, but is less relevant for rating individual securities of a highly rated corporation. If the capacity for repayment of an issuer's debt is large relative to its total debt, so that even the most junior claims are well-protected, the ranking with respect to payment is less important to rating individual securities. Where debt capacity is merely adequate or even insufficient to provide for all claims, priority of payment is important for ratings because the most junior debts are less likely to be fully repaid. The adjustments to the issuer's rating will typically be limited to one or two "notches" because all Morningstar credit ratings are fundamentally relative rankings of the likelihood of default. The ranking of a bond or loan with respect to payment in default should not make the rating diverge significantly from the likelihood of default. Recovery is a secondary consideration compared with default risk as even a debt instrument with excellent recovery characteristics will be delayed in payment, may not get post- petition interest, or have administrative costs connected with the bankruptcy or restructuring. The starting point for any adjustment is the consolidated corporate rating or CCR, which would be the rating of the ultimate parent's senior unsecured debt assuming that is the only class of debt; that all debt is issued by the ultimate parent level and guaranteed by all subsidiaries; and all of the domestic and foreign assets of the corporation were available to service that debt. Part I of this document explains parent and subsidiary relationships and how they may affect issuer ratings at the parent and subsidiary level. Part II explains the directional impact of corporate structure (structural subordination), seniority (contractual subordination), and security (collateral) on issue-level ratings (Issue Credit Ratings or ICRs). These directional impacts are the same at all rating levels but the magnitude of their influence on ratings varies with the issue-specific facts (for example, amount and quality of collateral) as well as the issuer's corporate credit rating. Part II also describes how Morningstar adjusts the issuer rating to arrive at an issue rating, taking into account both the direction and the significance of structure, seniority, and security. Page 2 of 8 Methodology for Rating Parents, Subsidiaries, and Issues | 9 September 2016 Healthcare Observer | 9 September 2016 Page 2 of 8 Page 2 of 8 Paper Title | 9 September 2016 Page 2 of 8 Healthcare Observer | 9 September 2016 Part I. Parent Subsidiary Relationships and Structural Subordination Corporations large enough to have publicly traded debt normally operate through one or more subsidiaries. These may be owned directly (parent owns the equity of the subsidiary) or indirectly through an intermediate holding company whose only asset is the equity of the operating subsidiary. Debt is often issued by both a parent and one or more operating companies; sometimes by an intermediate holding company or finance company subsidiary. Priority of payment can be determined for the debt instruments of a corporation at any CCR rating level, from AAA to C, but is less relevant for rating individual securities of a highly rated corporation. If the capacity for repayment of an issuer's debt is large relative to its total debt, so that even the most junior claims are well-protected, the ranking with respect to payment is less important to rating individual securities. Where debt capacity is merely adequate or even insufficient to provide for all claims, priority of payment is important for ratings because the most junior debts are less likely to be fully repaid. The adjustments to the issuer's rating will typically be limited to one or two "notches" because all Morningstar credit ratings are fundamentally relative rankings of the likelihood of default. The ranking of a bond or loan with respect to payment in default should not make the rating diverge significantly from the likelihood of default. Recovery is a secondary consideration compared with default risk as even a debt instrument with excellent recovery characteristics will be delayed in payment, may not get post- petition interest, or have administrative costs connected with the bankruptcy or restructuring. The starting point for any adjustment is the consolidated corporate rating or CCR, which would be the rating of the ultimate parent's senior unsecured debt assuming that is the only class of debt; that all debt is issued by the ultimate parent level and guaranteed by all subsidiaries; and all of the domestic and foreign assets of the corporation were available to service that debt. Parent and Subsidiaries: Separate but Equal In most cases, the issuer credit rating of a subsidiary will be the same as its parent and both will be the same as the consolidated corporate rating, even though they are separate legal entities. There are a number of reasons for this linkage. × Guarantees and Other Forms of Support. In some cases the parent will provide explicit guarantees of a subsidiary's debt (downstream guarantees) or a subsidiary will guarantee the debt of its parent (upstream guarantees). Where such guarantees are "blanket" guarantees the linkage is unambiguous. If only some of the debt is guaranteed, the linkage will depend on the extent of the debt guaranteed. There are many forms of support other than guarantees; for example, a parent may provide creditors of its captive finance subsidiary an enforceable pledge to maintain a minimum level of equity or maximum level of leverage at the subsidiary (commonly known as keep-well agreements). × Cross Defaults: The inclusion of cross defaults in the bond indentures and bank loan agreements of the parent is another common mechanism that supports linking the ICRs. In this case, the default of a material amount of debt at a subsidiary would then automatically default the debt at the parent, thus linking the parent and subsidiary ICRs. MCR will examine relevant debt and corporate legal documents Page 3 of 8 Methodology for Rating Parents, Subsidiaries, and Issues | 9 September 2016 Healthcare Observer | 9 September 2016 Page 3 of 8 Page 3 of 8 Paper Title | 9 September 2016 Page 3 of 8 Healthcare Observer | 9 September 2016 to determine the degree of linkage between the parent and subsidiary issuer ratings. But even in the absence of cross defaults or guarantees, the parent typically has powerful incentives for supporting its subsidiaries: commercial reputation and operational integration. × Commercial Reputation. Allowing the default of a material subsidiary risk calling into question the parent's willingness as well as its capacity to adhere to its contractual obligations. This could cause liquidity problems for the parent, including a potential downgrading of the long and short term credit ratings, and damage customer and supplier relationships. × Integration. Allowing a subsidiary to default could also threaten the parent's business to the extent that the subsidiary was an essential, integrated part of the operations of the consolidated enterprise. While some types of business can continue to operate in bankruptcy most would face serious difficulty with suppliers and customers. In any case, the parent's control over the company would be likely be impaired. Parent and Subsidiaries: Separate and Unequal There are some circumstances in which the issuer credit ratings of the parent and its subsidiaries will be different. These cases require the parent and subsidiary issuer credits rating to be evaluated on a standalone basis as well as examining the degree of credit support among the parent and its subsidiaries. Examples of circumstances requiring different issuer ratings at the parent and subsidiary include the following: × Subsidiary issuer rating higher. The subsidiaries may operate in regulated industries, such as electric utilities and banking, where regulators require higher credit quality for the operating subsidiary than is optimal for the parent. × Subsidiary debt agreements may require higher credit quality (such as restrictive leverage covenants) than the parent's or limit the parent's ability to access subsidiary cash (tight restricted payments covenants and limits on upstream guarantees). × Subsidiary issuer rating lower. The subsidiary could be exposed to some risk or liability, which the parent wants to limit to the subsidiary and there are no legal or reputational obstacles to limiting support of the subsidiary. In the absence of guarantees or other support agreements, a parent has no more claim than any other shareholder for a subsidiary corporation's debts. × Foreign subsidiaries may be exposed to country risks that impair credit quality. Furthermore, the assets of foreign entities are also generally less available to serve as collateral to secure domestic debt issues. Distinctions between parent and subsidiary issuer ratings
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Subnational Debt of China: the Politics-Finance Nexus*
    Subnational Debt of China: The Politics-Finance Nexus* HAOYU GAO, HONG RU and DRAGON YONGJUN TANG September 12, 2017 Abstract Using comprehensive proprietary loan-level data, we analyze the borrowing and defaults of local governments in China. Contrary to conventional wisdom, policy bank loans to local governments have significantly lower default rates than commercial bank loans with similar characteristics. Policy bank loans are relatively more important for local politician’s career advancement. Distressed local governments often strategically choose to default on loans from commercial banks. This selection is more pronounced after the abrupt ending of the “four trillion” stimulus when China started tightening local government borrowing. Our findings shed light on potential approach to hardening budget constraint for local government. JEL Codes: G21, G32, H74 * Haoyu Gao, Central University of Finance and Economics, 39 South College Road, Haidian Dist., Beijing 100081, China; [email protected]. Hong Ru, Nanyang Technological University, 50 Nanyang Avenue, Singapore, 639798; [email protected]. Dragon Yongjun Tang, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong; [email protected]. We thank Warren Bailey, Patrick Bolton, Anna Cieslak, Jinquan Duan, Di Gong, Brett Green, Zhiguo He, Harrison Hong, Sheng Huang, Liangliang Jiang, Bo Li, Hao Liang, Jose Liberti, Ruichang Lu, Wenlan Qian, Jay Ritter, Jose Scheinkman, Victor Shih, Michael Song, Mark Spiegel, Chenggang Xu, Xiaoyun Yu, Weina Zhang, Li-An Zhou, Hao Zhou, staff at China Development
    [Show full text]
  • Convertible Financing Bonds As Backdoor Equity
    Journal of Financial Economics 32 (1992) 3-21. North-Holland Convertible bonds as backdoor equity financing Jeremy C. Stein* Massachusetts Insrirure of Technology. Cambridge, .MA 021.59. LISA Received September 1991, final version received March 1992 This paper argues that corporations may use convertible bonds as an indirect way to get equity into their capital structures when adverse-selection problems make a conventional stock issue unattrac- tive. Unlike other theories of convertible bond issuance. the model here highlights: 1) the importance of call provisions on convertibles and 2) the significance of costs of financial distress to the information content of a convertible issue. 1. Introduction Convertible bonds are an important source of financing for many corpora- tions. According to data presented in Essig (1991), more than 10% of all COMPUSTAT companies had ratios of convertible debt to total debt exceeding 33% during the period 1963-1984. A good deal of research effort has been devoted to developing pricing models for convertibles,’ as well as to the issues surrounding corporations’ policies for calling them.2 Somewhat less work has addressed the fundamental question of why companies issue convertibles in the first place. This paper develops a rationale for the use of convertible debt. I argue that companies may use convertible bonds to get equity into their capital structures Correspondence to: Jeremy C. Stein, Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 50 Memorial Drive, Cambridge, MA 02139. USA. *This research is supported by a Batterymarch Fellowship and by the International Financial Services Research Center at MIT. I thank Paul Asquith, Kenneth Froot, Steven Kaplan, Wayne Mikkelson (the referee).
    [Show full text]
  • Capital Markets
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY A Financial System That Creates Economic Opportunities Capital Markets OCTOBER 2017 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY A Financial System That Creates Economic Opportunities Capital Markets Report to President Donald J. Trump Executive Order 13772 on Core Principles for Regulating the United States Financial System Steven T. Mnuchin Secretary Craig S. Phillips Counselor to the Secretary Staff Acknowledgments Secretary Mnuchin and Counselor Phillips would like to thank Treasury staff members for their contributions to this report. The staff’s work on the report was led by Brian Smith and Amyn Moolji, and included contributions from Chloe Cabot, John Dolan, Rebekah Goshorn, Alexander Jackson, W. Moses Kim, John McGrail, Mark Nelson, Peter Nickoloff, Bill Pelton, Fred Pietrangeli, Frank Ragusa, Jessica Renier, Lori Santamorena, Christopher Siderys, James Sonne, Nicholas Steele, Mark Uyeda, and Darren Vieira. iii A Financial System That Creates Economic Opportunities • Capital Markets Table of Contents Executive Summary 1 Introduction 3 Scope of This Report 3 Review of the Process for This Report 4 The U.S. Capital Markets 4 Summary of Issues and Recommendations 6 Capital Markets Overview 11 Introduction 13 Key Asset Classes 13 Key Regulators 18 Access to Capital 19 Overview and Regulatory Landscape 21 Issues and Recommendations 25 Equity Market Structure 47 Overview and Regulatory Landscape 49 Issues and Recommendations 59 The Treasury Market 69 Overview and Regulatory Landscape 71 Issues and Recommendations 79
    [Show full text]
  • The Importance of the Capital Structure in Credit Investments: Why Being at the Top (In Loans) Is a Better Risk Position
    Understanding the importance of the capital structure in credit investments: Why being at the top (in loans) is a better risk position Before making any investment decision, whether it’s in equity, fixed income or property it’s important to consider whether you are adequately compensated for the risks you are taking. Understanding where your investment sits in the capital structure will help you recognise the potential downside that could result in permanent loss of capital. Within a typical business there are various financing securities used to fund existing operations and growth. Most companies will use a combination of both debt and equity. The debt may come in different forms including senior secured loans and unsecured bonds, while equity typically comes as preference or ordinary shares. The exact combination of these instruments forms the company’s “capital structure”, and is usually designed to suit the underlying cash flows and assets of the business as well as investor and management risk appetites. The most fundamental aspect for debt investors in any capital structure is seniority and security in the capital structure which is reflected in the level of leverage and impacts the amount an investor should recover if a company fails to meet its financial obligations. Seniority refers to where an instrument ranks in priority of payment. Creditors (debt holders) normally have a legal right to be paid both interest and principal in priority to shareholders. Amongst creditors, “senior” creditors will be paid in priority to “junior” creditors. Security refers to a creditor’s right to take a “mortgage” or “lien” over property and other assets of a company in a default scenario.
    [Show full text]
  • Vantage Towers AG
    Prospectus dated March 8, 2021 Prospectus for the public offering in the Federal Republic of Germany of 88,888,889 existing ordinary registered shares with no par value (Namensaktien ohne Nennbetrag) from the holdings of the Existing Shareholder, of 22,222,222 existing ordinary registered shares with no par value (Namensaktien ohne Nennbetrag) from the holdings of the Existing Shareholder, with the number of shares to be actually placed with investors subject to the exercise of an Upsize Option upon the decision of the Existing Shareholder, in agreement with the Joint Global Coordinators, on the date of pricing, and of 13,333,333 existing ordinary registered shares with no par value (Namensaktien ohne Nennbetrag) from the holdings of the Existing Shareholder in connection with a possible over-allotment, and at the same time for the admission to trading on the regulated market (regulierter Markt) of the Frankfurt Stock Exchange (Frankfurter Wertpapierbörse) with simultaneous admission to the sub- segment of the regulated market with additional post-admission obligations (Prime Standard) of the Frankfurt Stock Exchange (Frankfurter Wertpapierbörse) of 505,782,265 existing ordinary registered shares with no par value (Namensaktien ohne Nennbetrag) (existing share capital), each such share with a notional value of EUR 1.00 in the Company’s share capital and full dividend rights as of April 1, 2020 of Vantage Towers AG Düsseldorf, Germany Price Range: EUR 22.50 – EUR 29.00 International Securities Identification Number (ISIN): DE000A3H3LL2 German Securities Code (Wertpapierkennnummer, WKN): A3H 3LL Common Code: 230832161 Ticker Symbol: VTWR Joint Global Coordinators BofA Securities Morgan Stanley UBS Joint Bookrunners Barclays Berenberg BNP PARIBAS Deutsche Bank Goldman Sachs Jefferies TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I.
    [Show full text]
  • Determinants of Convertible Bond Structure;
    University of New Orleans ScholarWorks@UNO Department of Economics and Finance Working Papers, 1991-2006 Department of Economics and Finance 2005 Determinants of Convertible Bond Structure; Sudha Krishnaswami University of New Orleans Devrim Yaman Western Michigan University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uno.edu/econ_wp Recommended Citation Krishnaswami, Sudha and Yaman, Devrim, "Determinants of Convertible Bond Structure;" (2005). Department of Economics and Finance Working Papers, 1991-2006. Paper 37. https://scholarworks.uno.edu/econ_wp/37 This Working Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Economics and Finance at ScholarWorks@UNO. It has been accepted for inclusion in Department of Economics and Finance Working Papers, 1991-2006 by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UNO. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Determinants of Convertible Bond Structure Sudha Krishnaswami* Department of Economics & Finance College of Business Administration University of New Orleans New Orleans, LA 70148 (504) 280-6488 [email protected] Devrim Yaman Department of Finance & Commercial Law Haworth College of Business Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, MI 49008 (269) 387-5749 [email protected] _______________________________ * Corresponding author. We thank Ranjan D’Mello, Tarun Mukherjee, Oranee Tawatnuntachai, Oscar Varela, Gerald Whitney, and seminar participants at the University of New Orleans, the 2002 Financial Management Association Meetings, and the 2004 European Financial Management Association Meetings for their comments and suggestions. Devrim Yaman acknowledges funding support from the Faculty Research and Creative Activities Support Fund at Western Michigan University. All errors remain our responsibility. Determinants of Convertible Bond Structure Abstract Theoretical research argues that convertible bonds mitigate the contracting costs of moral hazard, adverse selection, and financial distress.
    [Show full text]
  • Note on Intercreditor Priority How Subordination and Security Affect Credit Structure
    Note on Intercreditor Priority How subordination and security affect credit structure The Basics of Priority A company in financial distress may not have enough cash or other assets to satisfy all of its creditors. Creditors are not necessarily treated equally in this situation; some may be repaid fully in cash, others may receive new debt or equity securities in satisfaction of their claims, and others may receive nothing at all. Intercreditor priority is the order in which creditors’ claims are satisfied using a company’s cash and other assets in times of distress, such as a corporate liquidation or reorganization. Chart 1: Intercreditor priority ��������������� � ���������������� �������������������� �� �������� �������������������� ��������������� ������������ �������� Note: Senior debt can be structured as loans or bonds, senior subordinated debt is typically high yield bonds, and junior subordinated debt is often referred to as mezzanine finance. The methods for establishing intercreditor priority are generally determined by the laws of the states and countries in which a company operates or has assets. Bankrupt- cy laws and laws surrounding the pledging of collateral vary from country to country or even within countries. Given this variation, it is important to obtain legal advice when executing or evaluating transactions involving different classes of creditors. ©2005 FINANCIAL TRAINING PARTNERS www.fintrain.com 1 Though the intricacies of the law may differ by jurisdiction, generally there are five methods used to establish or determine priority. Contractual Subordination This requires a subordination agreement between a company and one or more of its creditors. Structural Subordination This is done through the company’s legal organization; it typically involves a holding company and operating subsidiaries, and the appropriate placement of debt within that structure.
    [Show full text]
  • The Financial Channels of Labor Rigidities: Evidence from Portugal∗
    The Financial Channels of Labor Rigidities: Evidence from Portugal∗ Edoardo M. Acabbi Harvard University JOB MARKET PAPER Ettore Panetti Banco de Portugal, CRENoS, UECE-REM and Suerf Alessandro Sforza University of Bologna and CESifo January 29, 2020 MOST RECENT VERSION Abstract How do credit shocks affect labor market reallocation and firms’ exit, and how doestheir propagation depend on labor rigidities at the firm level? To answer these questions, we match administrative data on worker, firms, banks and credit relationships in Portugal, and conduct an event study of the interbank market freeze at the end of 2008. Consistent with other empirical literature, we provide novel evidence that the credit shock had significant effects on employment and assets dynamics and firms’ survival. These findings areentirely driven by the interaction of the credit shock with labor market frictions, determined by rigidities in labor costs and exposure to working-capital financing, which we label “labor-as- leverage” and “labor-as-investment” financial channels. The credit shock explains about 29 percent of the employment loss among large Portuguese firms between 2008 and 2013, and contributes to productivity losses due to increased labor misallocation. ∗Edoardo M. Acabbi thanks Gabriel Chodorow-Reich, Emmanuel Farhi, Samuel G. Hanson and Jeremy Stein for their extensive advice and support. The authors thank Martina Uccioli, Andrea Alati, António Antunes, Omar Barbiero, Diana Bonfim, Andrea Caggese, Luca Citino, Andrew Garin, Edward L. Glaeser, Ana Gouveia,
    [Show full text]
  • Global Senior Secured Bonds
    FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS GLOBAL SENIOR SECURED BONDS GLOBAL SENIOR SECURED BONDS OFFER CAPITAL STRUCTURE SENIORITY WHAT ARE SENIOR SECURED BONDS? SENIOR DEFINITION OF “SENIOR” AND “SECURED”? A bond is a debt obligation sold to investors. If a corporation defaults on its obligations, it can be forced into bankruptcy liquidation, in which case its assets are sold off to repay its debts. Debts are repaid in a prescribed order of priority. “Senior” debt comes first, SENIOR SECURED ahead of junior, or subordinated, debt. If a bond is LOANS / BONDS classified as “secured”, it is backed by issuer collateral, or some form of assets. As such, in the event that a company defaults, a secured bond may have a higher recovery rate of the amount invested than an unsecured bond (see page 3 for details). FOR SENIORITY, WHAT ARE “FIRST LIEN” AND “SECOND LIEN”? While both first lien and second lien bonds are forms of senior debt, second lien bonds are second in priority to HIGH YIELD first lien bonds when it comes to repayment in the case BONDS of bankruptcy or default. ARE THESE BONDS USUALLY “SENIOR AND SECURED” OR “SENIOR OR SECURED”? The term senior secured means that a bond is both senior and secured in its structure. A bond can also be senior but unsecured, meaning there is no specific collateral guaranteeing the bond. EQUITY ARE THE ISSUERS OF SENIOR SECURED HIGH YIELD BONDS SMALLER AND UNKNOWN NAMES? SUBORDINATE Not necessarily. Some of the most recognizable brands and leaders within their respective industries have senior secured bond facilities outstanding, such as Burger King, Hertz, Bausch Health Companies and FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY.
    [Show full text]
  • Seniority of Sovereign Debts
    07--Ch. 7--249-288 8/12/04 11:25 AM Page 249 7 Seniority of Sovereign Debts A formal insolvency regime typically sets out, in general terms, how dif- ferent types of claims on a distressed private firm will be treated in a re- structuring and the order of payment in the event of outright liquidation. Bankruptcy law usually indicates that equity is junior to debt: Debt gets paid first, and if debt cannot be paid, debtholders may take control of the firm. Back taxes get paid ahead of most private debts. Different kinds of debts may have different levels of priority—for example, debts backed by collateral are treated better than unsecured debts. These rules tell a firm’s creditors where their claims stand in the pecking order. In contrast, no formal rules of priority lay out how different types of claims on a distressed sovereign will be treated. Nor does a court have the power to force a sovereign government to respect any rules of priority.1 The difficulties of taking effective legal action against a sovereign—dis- cussed in depth in chapter 8—can give the sovereign the ability to dis- criminate in favor of some classes of claims. Different creditors will argue that their claims should be given priority. As a result, the relative stand- ing of various claims on a sovereign government is often ambiguous. The priority that the sovereign opts to grant different types of debt may not match creditors’ prior expectations. 1. In some countries, certain public entities are subject to an insolvency regime.
    [Show full text]
  • Managing the IPO Process
    ACCS 2007 ANNUAL MEETING ENJOYING THE RIDE ON THE TRACK TO SUCCESS 807 - Managing the IPO Process Gary Hirsch General Counsel IntraLinks, Inc. August Moretti Chief Financial Officer Alexza Pharmecueticals Ken Siegel General Counsel Verigy Mark A. Stachiw Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary MetroPCS Communications, Inc. This material is protected by copyright. Copyright © 2007 various authors and the Association of Corporate Counsel (ACC). Materials may not be reproduced without the consent of ACC. Reproduction permission requests should be directed to the Legal Resources Department at ACC: 202/293-4103, ext. 342; [email protected] ACC's 2007 ANNUAL MEETING Enjoying the Ride on the Track to Success Faculty Biographies ACC Annual Meeting 2007 - Session 807 : Managing the IPO Process Gary Hirsch Materials Gary Hirsch is the chief legal officer of IntraLinks in New York City, a leading software-as-a- 1. Program Outline service company. Throughout his career, Mr. Hirsch has advised corporations on acquisitions, financings, governance matters, and commercial transactions including PART 1 – Planning and Process Overview technology licensing 2. Going Public – Decisions and Process Overview (Heller Ehrman) 3. Responsibility Checklist 4. Org Meeting Binder including Timeline Prior to joining IntraLinks, Mr. Hirsch was general counsel of Currenex, Inc., an 5. Data Room (Due Diligence) Index institutional currency trading platform recently acquired by State Street Bank. Before that he served as assistant counsel in the corporate legal department of Marsh & McLennan PART 2 – Managing Communications: Quiet Period, Analysts and Investor Relations Companies. He began his career as an associate at Willkie Farr & Gallagher in New York. 6.
    [Show full text]
  • NYSE IPO Guide
    NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE STOCK NEW YORK IPO Guide, Second Edition IPO Guide, Second NYSE IPO GUIDE For an electronic version of the NYSE IPO Guide, please go to: www.nyx.com/ipo-guide 83458_cvr_ptg01_hires.indd 1 19/08/13 7:41 PM Publisher Timothy Dempsey Consulting publisher Brian Curran, NYSE Editorial and Production Services PreMediaGlobal Consulting editors Nicolas Grabar, Sandra L. Flow and John Palenberg Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP NYSE IPO Guide, Second Edition, is published by Caxton Business & Legal, Inc 27 N Wacker Drive, Suite 601 Chicago, IL 60606 United States Tel +1 312 361 0821 Fax +1 312 278 0821 www.caxtoninc.com Printed by RR Donnelley ISBN 978-0-615-84229-5 NYSE IPO Guide, Second Edition, © 2013 Caxton Business & Legal, Inc Copyright in individual sections rests with the co-publishers. No photocopying: copyright licenses do not apply. DISCLAIMER This guide is written as a general guide only. It should not be relied upon as a substitute for specific legal or financial advice. Professional advice should always be sought POTENTIAL UNLOCKED... before taking any action based on the information provided. Every effort has been made to ensure that the information in this ON THE BIGGEST STAGE guide is correct at the time of publication. The views expressed in this guide are those of the authors. The publishers and IN BUSINESS authors stress that this publication does not purport to provide investment advice; nor do they accept responsibility for any errors or omissions contained herein. Tableau Software (NYSE: DATA) The NYSE IPO Guide, Second Edition, contains summary information about legal and regulatory aspects of the IPO process When a company goes public on the NYSE, it is joining the premier global exchange and beginning a and is current as of the date of its initial publication (August 16, 2013).
    [Show full text]